Can someone explain to me about academies vs primary schools?

[LiegeAndLief]

We have a lot of new houses near us and the local primary schools are now too small. Apparently under current rules a new school would have to be a academy rather than a council run primary school. I've googled but not got very far - can anyone explain the main differences please?

[EmmaGellerGreen]

I'm sure someone will provide a more comprehensive answer soon but here is my brief understanding. Historically, schools have been run by the Local Authority - who employ staff, provide legal/HR services etc and own the buildings. Schools have some financial responsibility in that their annual funding is delegated to them. They are bound by the national curriculum.

Academies are freed from LA control. They receive funding directly from central government and own their premises. They are not bound by the national curriculum and do not have any support from the LA. So they are much free-er to make decisions but have a much higher risk profile.

[springrain]

I would ask your council or local councilor what they are proposing to do. Surrey had a situation like this recently near a new housing estate and they still planned what was required. They then asked for proposals from academies to run the school. They had a number of proposals ranging from large academy chains to smaller chains of academies. this explains it more

[admission]

In essence you are correct LiegeandLief. Any completely new school the Local Authority can say one is needed but whatever eventually happens any new school will be an academy or a free school. Only if nobody else wants to take it on can the LA be involved in opening the school
However when it comes to expanding existing schools that is something that the LA can do.
The differences as far as any parent is concerned will probably not be that great unless the school decides to go well away from the national curriculum.